Utilizing gas flux from automated head chamber systems to estimate dietary energy values for beef cattle fed a finishing diet.

Dietary net energy for maintenance (NEm) and gain (NEg) can be estimated using calculations based on live performance or adjusted-final body weight, which is calculated based on carcass characteristics. These values are commonly referred to as performance-adjusted (pa) NEm (paNEm) and NEg (paNEg). The NEm and NEg of a diet can also be estimated by adding recovered energy (RE) with heat production (HP) derived from an automated head chamber system (AHCS), which we will term gas-adjusted (ga) NEm (gaNEm) and NEg (gaNEg). Furthermore, HP from the Brouwer equation requires an estimate of urinary nitrogen (UN) excretion, which can be calculated based on N intake, blood urea N, UN concentration, and urine creatinine, or it could be zeroed. Alternatively, HP can be calculated using an alternative equation based on the respiratory quotient. Demonstrating agreement between pa and ga derived dietary energy values provides an opportunity to validate using the AHCS for energetic experiments and this comparison has not been conducted previously. Accordingly, the objective of this experiment was to assess the agreement between live and carcass paNEm and paNEg with gaNEm and gaNEg, where HP was calculated using 4 different approaches. Estimates of HP were not different (P = 0.99) between the 4 approaches employed, indicating that all options investigated are appropriate. Live paNEm and paNEg had a higher agreement (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient [CCC] = 0.91) with gaNEm and gaNEg than carcass values (CCC ≤ 0.84). These results suggest that researchers can implement the AHCS to provide good estimates of dietary energy values in finishing beef cattle that are unrestrained.

Automated head chamber systems (AHCS) implemented into beef cattle research allow estimation of gas flux, heat production (HP), and calculated gas-adjusted dietary net energy for maintenance (gaNEm) and gain (gaNEg) values when paired with recovered energy. However, a comparison between AHCS-derived values and performance-adjusted NEm (paNEm) and NEg (paNEg) from either live performance (live paNEm and paNEg) or carcass data (carcass paNEm and paNEg) has not been conducted. Accordingly, the objectives of this experiment were to evaluate the agreement between gaNEm and gaNEg, estimated using different approaches for calculating HP, with live paNEm and paNEg or carcass paNEm and paNEg. Accounting for urinary nitrogen or methane when calculating HP does not appreciably influence HP estimates or subsequent calculations to estimate dietary NEm and NEg. There was excellent agreement between live paNEm and gaNEm, and between paNEg and gaNEg. Measures of precision, accuracy, and agreement were lower for carcass than for live-derived values when compared to gaNEm and gaNEg but were still acceptable. These results suggest that researchers can implement the AHCS to provide estimates of HP, gas flux, and estimates of dietary energy values in unrestrained finishing beef cattle-fed diets ranging in crude protein content (10.8% to 12.5%). Additional research is warranted on the use of the AHCS to conduct energetic studies across varying diets and production systems, particularly grazing systems.

Antibimicrobial Susceptibility of Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole and 3rd-Generation Cephalosporin-Resistant Escherichia coli Isolates Enumerated Longitudinally from Feedlot Arrival to Harvest in High-Risk Beef Cattle Administered Common Metaphylactic Antimicrobials.

Multidrug resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli threaten the preservation of antimicrobials to treat infections in humans and livestock. Thus, it is important to understand where antimicrobial-resistant E. coli persist and factors that contribute to its their development. Crossbred cattle (n = 249; body weight = 244 kg ±25 kg standard deviation) were blocked by arrival date and assigned metaphylactic antimicrobial treatments of sterile saline control, tulathromycin (TUL), ceftiofur, or florfenicol at random. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (COTR) and third-generation cephalosporin (CTXR)-resistant E. coli were isolated from fecal samples on days 0, 28, 56, 112, 182, and study END (day 252 for block 1 and day 242 for block 2). Then, susceptibility testing was conducted on all confirmed isolates. MDR was detected in both COTR and CTXR E. coli isolates. In COTR isolates, the number of antimicrobials each isolate was resistant to and the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, ceftriaxone, and gentamicin was greatest on day 28 compared with all other days (p ≤ 0.04). Similarly, chloramphenicol MIC was greater on day 28 than on day 0 (p < 0.01). Overall, sulfisoxazole MIC was less for TUL than all other treatments (p ≤ 0.02), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole MIC was greater for TUL than all other treatments (p ≤ 0.03). Finally, there was no effect of treatment, day, or treatment × day for tetracycline or meropenem MIC (p ≥ 0.07). In CTXR isolates, there was an effect of day for all antimicrobials tested except ampicillin and meropenem (p ≤ 0.06). In conclusion, administering a metaphylactic antimicrobial at feedlot arrival did influence the susceptibility of COTR and CTXR E. coli. However, MDR E. coli are widely distributed, and the MIC for most antimicrobials was not different from the initial value upon completion of the feeding period.

The effects of administering different metaphylactic antimicrobials on growth performance and health outcomes of high-risk, newly received feedlot steers.

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is the primary animal health concern facing feedlot producers. Many antimicrobial mitigation strategies are available, but few studies have compared feedlot performance during both the receiving and finishing periods following application of different antimicrobials used as metaphylaxis at arrival. The objective of this study was to compare antimicrobial metaphylaxis methods on clinical health and growth performance across both the receiving and finishing periods. A total of 238 multiple-sourced steers in two source blocks were used in a generalized complete block design. The four treatments included: 1) a negative control, 5 mL of sterile saline injected subcutaneously (CON); 2) subcutaneous administration of florfenicol at 40 mg/kg of BW (NUF); 3) subcutaneous administration of ceftiofur in the posterior aspect of the ear at 6.6 mg/kg of BW (EXC); and 4) subcutaneous administration of tulathromycin at 2.5 mg/kg of BW (DRA). The morbidity rate for the first treatment of BRD was decreased for the DRA and EXC treatments compared to CON and NUF (P < 0.01). Additionally, average daily gain (ADG), dry matter intake (DMI), and gain-to-feed (G:F) were greater (P ≤ 0.02) in the DRA treatment during the receiving period compared to all other treatments. The ADG was also greater (P < 0.05) for EXC than the CON treatment throughout the finishing period. Nonetheless, other growth performance variables did not differ among metaphylactic treatments during the finishing period (P ≥ 0.14). Likewise, no differences in carcass characteristics or liver abscess score were observed (P ≥ 0.18). All complete blood count (CBC) variables were affected by day (P ≤ 0.01) except mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (P = 0.29). Treatment × time interactions were observed for platelet count, white blood cell (WBC) count, monocyte count and percentage, and lymphocyte percentage (P ≤ 0.03). However, there were no observed hematological variables that differed among treatment (P ≥ 0.10). The results indicate that some commercially available antimicrobials labeled for metaphylactic use are more efficacious than others in decreasing morbidity rate.

Metaphylactic antimicrobial effects on occurrences of antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella enterica, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. measured longitudinally from feedlot arrival to harvest in high-risk beef cattle.

AIMS: Our objective was to determine how injectable antimicrobials affected populations of Salmonella enterica, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. in feedlot cattle. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two arrival date blocks of high-risk crossbred beef cattle (n = 249; mean BW = 244 kg) were randomly assigned one of four antimicrobial treatments administered on day 0: sterile saline control (CON), tulathromycin (TUL), ceftiofur (CEF) or florfenicol (FLR). Faecal samples were collected on days 0, 28, 56, 112, 182 and study end (day 252 for block 1 and day 242 for block 2). Hide swabs and subiliac lymph nodes were collected the day before and the day of harvest. Samples were cultured for antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. The effect of treatment varied by day across all targeted bacterial populations (p ≤ 0.01) except total E. coli. Total E. coli counts were greatest on days 112, 182 and study end (p ≤ 0.01). Tulathromycin resulted in greater counts and prevalence of Salmonella from faeces than CON at study end (p ≤ 0.01). Tulathromycin and CEF yielded greater Salmonella hide prevalence and greater counts of 128ERYR E. coli at study end than CON (p ≤ 0.01). No faecal Salmonella resistant to tetracyclines or third-generation cephalosporins were detected. Ceftiofur was associated with greater counts of 8ERYR Enterococcus spp. at study end (p ≤ 0.03). By the day before harvest, antimicrobial use did not increase prevalence or counts for all other bacterial populations compared with CON (p ≥ 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in feedlot cattle is not caused solely by using a metaphylactic antimicrobial on arrival, but more likely a multitude of environmental and management factors.

Effects of physical activity and feed and water restriction at reimplanting time on feed intake patterns, growth performance, and carcass characteristics of finishing beef steers.

In the feedlot, there can be a decrease in dry matter intake (DMI) associated with reimplanting cattle that negatively affects growth performance. This study was conducted to determine the mechanisms causing a decrease in DMI after reimplanting and identify a strategy to mitigate the decrease. Crossbred steers (n = 200; 10 pens/treatment; initial bodyweight [BW] = 386 ±â€…4.9 kg) were used in a randomized complete block design experiment. Cattle were implanted with Revalor-IS on day 0. Treatments included a Revalor-200 implant on day 90 before feeding with the following management practices imposed: 1) steers were returned to their home pen immediately after reimplant (PCON); 2) steers were placed in pens and restricted from feed and water for 4 h (RES); 3) steers were walked an additional 805 m after reimplant and then returned home (LOC); 4) steers were restricted from feed and water for 4 h and walked an additional 805 m (RES + LOC); 5) steers were given an oral bolus of Megasphaera elsdenii (Lactipro; MS Biotec, Wamego, KS) and were restricted from feed and water for 4 h, and then walked an additional 805 m (LACT). One hundred steers were given an ear tag to record minutes of activity (ESense Flex Tags, Allflex Livestock Intelligence, Madison, WI). As a percentage of BW, DMI was 5% greater (P = 0.01) from reimplant to end for PCON vs. RES, LOC, and RES + LOC treatments. Likewise, as a percentage of BW, DMI was 6.6% greater (P = 0.03) from reimplant to end and 4.0% greater (P = 0.05) overall for the PCON treatment vs. the LOC treatment. Overall, DMI as a percentage of BW was 3.3% greater (P = 0.02) for PCON vs. RES, LOC, and RES + LOC treatments. There was an increase in G:F from reimplant to end (P = 0.05) for RES + LOC vs. the LACT treatment. From these data, we conclude that restricting cattle from feed and water for 4 h after reimplanting did not alter subsequent DMI. Increasing locomotion had the greatest negative effect on DMI and growth performance. Management strategies to decrease locomotion associated with reimplanting would be beneficial to DMI and overall growth performance of finishing beef steers.